A-2019-00061 — Parks Canada
The complainant alleged that Parks Canada improperly withheld portions of a draft feasibility study under subsections 19(1), 20(1)(c), and 20(1)(d) of the Access to Information Act. During the investigation, the complainant narrowed the scope, and Parks Canada changed its reliance to subsection 20(1)(b). The Commissioner found that Parks Canada and the third party did not demonstrate that all the withheld information met the requirements of subsection 20(1)(b), particularly where some information was publicly available or where they no longer opposed disclosure. While some information was found to be legitimately confidential financial/commercial data, other parts were not. Consequently, the Commissioner ordered Parks Canada to disclose specific information that did not meet the exemption criteria. Parks Canada agreed to implement the order, leading to a well-founded complaint.
- 1Whether s.19(1) personal information was properly withheld
- 2Whether s.20(1)(c) financial impact on third party was properly withheld
- 3Whether s.20(1)(d) negotiations by a third party was properly withheld
- 4Whether s.20(1)(b) confidential third-party financial, commercial, scientific or technical information applied
- 5Whether the information was financial, commercial, scientific or technical
- 6Whether the information was confidential (not publicly available, expectation of confidence, fostering relationship)
- 7Whether the information was supplied by a third party to a government institution
- 8Whether the third party consistently treated the information as confidential
- Application of s.20(1)(b): Exemption not fully justified
- Confidentiality of financial data: Exemption upheld for some data
- Disclosure of records: Partial disclosure ordered
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well-founded
Complaint well founded — disclosure ordered
Parks Canada and the third party failed to demonstrate that all withheld information met the requirements of s.20(1)(b), particularly regarding confidentiality, as some information was publicly available or no longer opposed for disclosure. The Commissioner found that while some information was legitimately confidential, other parts were not.
The President and Chief Executive Officer of Parks Canada was ordered to disclose specific information from the draft feasibility study, including historical data, proposed closure dates, details on gondola design and visitors, and ticket pricing.
- s.19(1) ATIA
- s.20(1)(b) ATIA
- s.20(1)(c) ATIA
- s.20(1)(d) ATIA
- s.20(5) ATIA
- s.20(6) ATIA
- s.20(2) ATIA
- s.20(4) ATIA
- s.30(1)(a) ATIA
- s.35(2)(c) ATIA
- s.36.1(1) ATIA
- s.37(4) ATIA
- s.41 ATIA
- s.43 ATIA
This summary is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable
Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.
Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).
Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.
Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.
Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.
Upgrade to Pro